Testing Out Mesa's GLSL-To-TGSI Translator

[pingufunkybeat]

Plombo, how is this going to affect the work intel is doing on the GLSL compiler?

AFAIK, they don't use TGSI, and have no intention of doing it, and are using Mesa IR directly like before.

[Plombo]

Either Mesa's IR is doing good job or the alternative GLSL is doing a bad job There is almost no difference between them. Also i must admit the CPU usage is a nice thing, it should be used at most tests be it disk tests, filesystem or graphics. It shows us how "efficient" the code is.

It's not really who's doing a "good job" or "bad job". It's that Mesa IR and TGSI are so similar that translating from GLSL->TGSI produces almost the same code as GLSL->Mesa->TGSI.

Also, the CPU usage is actually irrelevant in this particular test, since the translator is only run once for each shader and isn't running during the whole test.

i allready use : GLSL-To-TGSI Translator

the biggest bugs are allready fixed.

the only ugly bug i can tell is a flash window mode black or white flickering bug.

Are you sure that's a problem with glsl_to_tgsi?

I don't know why people are complaining about performance. This work was about reducing complexity and adding features, not about performance.

The extra step through the Mesa IR really isn't such a big deal in the grand scheme of things. But it made things unnecessarily complex, and that's a bad thing.

It's good to know that there's at least one well-informed person in these forums.

Is there any wiki explaining pros and cons of this solution?

No.

[BenderRodriguez]

I don't know why people are complaining about performance. This work was about reducing complexity and adding features, not about performance.

The extra step through the Mesa IR really isn't such a big deal in the grand scheme of things. But it made things unnecessarily complex, and that's a bad thing.

Is there any wiki explaining pros and cons of this solution?

[pingufunkybeat]

I don't know why people are complaining about performance. This work was about reducing complexity and adding features, not about performance.

The extra step through the Mesa IR really isn't such a big deal in the grand scheme of things. But it made things unnecessarily complex, and that's a bad thing.

[BenderRodriguez]

On-Topic:

Either Mesa's IR is doing good job or the alternative GLSL is doing a bad job There is almost no difference between them. Also i must admit the CPU usage is a nice thing, it should be used at most tests be it disk tests, filesystem or graphics. It shows us how "efficient" the code is.

Off-Topic:
No matter what is written on this forum Michael get's abused every time, if i were him i'd just tell everyone to f*** *** if they don't like it, i actually feel sorry for all the abuses he is taking. I am with you Michael, you are not perfect always but you don't deserve definitely the abuses from some trolls...

[Plombo]

Normally I'm all for starving the trolls, but lately there's been more troll posts than non-troll posts. I don't post much on Phoronix purely because when I do it's typically only trolls that respond. It's discouraging to everyone who wants to foster a real discussion on the article. Hopefully by actively discouraging the trolls and encouraging real posts we can get real discussions to be the norm and not the rarity.

It would help if there were at least one on-topic post in this thread.

[ean5533]

My opinion is that it was just a troll post, so called grammar natzi one. Let just not feed the trolls.

Normally I'm all for starving the trolls, but lately there's been more troll posts than non-troll posts. I don't post much on Phoronix purely because when I do it's typically only trolls that respond. It's discouraging to everyone who wants to foster a real discussion on the article. Hopefully by actively discouraging the trolls and encouraging real posts we can get real discussions to be the norm and not the rarity.

[Maxim Levitsky]

Agreed. Whatever your opinions are of this site's articles, there are constructive ways to offer your criticisms. Calling the author a high school failure isn't constructive; it's destructive. It's childish and it doesn't help anyone.

The correct way to handle this type of concern:

1. Clearly explain what the problem is; e.g. typos are distracting. Politely tell the author that proof-reading would improve the quality of the article.
2. If article quality does not rise to meet your standards, stop reading articles on the site.

That's it! That's all it takes. Ranting in the forums doesn't help.

My opinion is that it was just a troll post, so called grammar natzi one. Let just not feed the trolls.

[ean5533]

It gets rather tiresome reading through so many abusive and snide comments...

Agreed. Whatever your opinions are of this site's articles, there are constructive ways to offer your criticisms. Calling the author a high school failure isn't constructive; it's destructive. It's childish and it doesn't help anyone.

The correct way to handle this type of concern:

1. Clearly explain what the problem is; e.g. typos are distracting. Politely tell the author that proof-reading would improve the quality of the article.
2. If article quality does not rise to meet your standards, stop reading articles on the site.

That's it! That's all it takes. Ranting in the forums doesn't help.

[Tgui]

Proofreading is important. It is unprofessional if there are glaring errors.

Sure, but stating Michael failed some portion of school was just insulting.

It gets rather tiresome reading through so many abusive and snide comments about Michaels writing, reporting, fact finding etc. Really, every discussion is littered with them.

Constructive feedback is welcome of course.